SubJeff on 17/10/2012 at 00:16

---

Probably, but then they are much more likely to be truly innocent so it's a bad idea. Plus you may not have access to them, or the suspect may not have any.

Of course you knew all of this.

CCCToad on 17/10/2012 at 05:43

---

Or...ok, let's make it tougher. Would it be OK to rape the guys wife in order to pressure him to give up information? And yes, that question is supposed to make you uncomfortable.

demagogue on 17/10/2012 at 06:33

---

Oh for goodness sake you are all beating around the bush. Standard Operating Procedure of the Myanmar military here is to gang rape women when they take a village for information, usually 20-30 men, often followed by foreign-object rape, something like a broomhandle tearing the uterus to shreds... If she dies they leave the naked body out in the open air, broomhandle still coming out of her, and on occasion dismember and lop off her breasts and limbs so she's left a decaying stub with a broomhandle coming out to send a message. If the torturers are "lucky" the woman will have an infant child which they throw into a fire to burn alive while she is watching, unable to do anything. Now this is SOP stuff ... probably because this is what they found most effective (probably because it *is* most effective). This is the kind of case I hear about all the time here (and yes those were all real cases I just recited). Should we let our tax money issue condoms to entire police forces for gang rapes if it's that effective? [Edit: I should add these women are in rebel villages in open rebellion against the government, and aiding rebel armies to fight the government's army, so of course they're "guilty".]

Seriously, if that kind of stuff is "okay" to do, even to the worst criminals, because it's the most effective in stopping "real atrocities", I think I'd rather prefer the human race just go extinct by its own self-loathing. We're going to go extinct sooner or later anyway, and it's not like there's going to be any species left to even remember we ever existed. All we have is our humanity now to show for ourselves. I plan on going to my grave with my dignity & my humanity.

Edit: @SubjEff you can't work me up as devil's advocate if my job is to work you up as God's advocate.

Edit2: And to deal with this strawman, of course I would never roll over in the face of many thousands of innocent people being threatened. I'd work my damnedest to stop it, including very vigorous interrogation short of torture. But the crime has its root in the enemy's inhumanity, and I see no justifiable grounds in participating in that inhumanity for whatever reason.

DDL on 17/10/2012 at 18:59

---

Problem with questions like that is they're extreme. They sound really OMG THINK OF TEH LIEVS but then you realise that you're now setting up a situation where an arbitrary line has to be drawn:

"Would you stop short of torture if you knew the perpetrator had information that would save thousands of lives?"

"Would you stop short of torture if you knew the perpetrator had information that would save hundreds of lives?"

"Would you stop short of torture if you knew the perpetrator had information that would save tens of lives?"

"Would you stop short of torture if you knew the perpetrator had information that would save a life?"

"Would you stop short of torture if you knew the perpetrator had information that would stop someone getting really badly hurt?"

"Would you stop short of torture if you knew the perpetrator had information that would stop someone getting quite badly hurt?"

"Would you stop short of torture if you knew the perpetrator had information that would stop someone being a bit hurt?"

It's a sliding scale, and you'd have to pick a point somewhere that is the "LINE OF DO NOT CROSS", or you're getting into torture for mild inconveniences, and since you're now torturing anyway, that line becomes easier to move.

Setting it at "never" circumvents this problem.

Plus realistically it's going to happen sometimes anyway, because we're people and we're douchebags, but at least if the bar is set at "never", it means this inevitable, regrettable torture is always wrong.

Vivian on 17/10/2012 at 23:50

---

.. hang on just realised I was pissing in the wind, sorry.